Cited by 1Physical Activity and HealthDiabetes Management and EducationMobile Health and mHealth Applications

Technology and Human Connection to Prevent Diabetes in Rural United States

Dachel, Theresa A., Mota, Dalete·2021·The Journal for Nurse Practitioners

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.nurpra.2021.06.001

Cites

18 of 18 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • TM effects on consumer experience were varied: 5 (71.4%) studies reported positive effects, 1 (14.2%) no discernible effect, and 1 (14.2%) mixed effects.

    “The effects of TM on consumer experience were varied, with 5 (71.4%) studies [39,44,48,53,54] reporting positive effects, 1 (14.2%) study [5] with no discernible effect, and 1 (14.2%) study [55] with mixed effects.”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Dachel, T. A., & Mota, D.
Venue
The Journal for Nurse Practitioners
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2021-10
Volume
17
Issue
9
Pages
1137-1140
ISSN
1555-4155 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3167607518
Cited by
1
References
18
Citations by year
2025: 1
FWCI
0.00
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
The Journal for Nurse Practitioners (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Physical Activity and Health
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diabetes Management and Education
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Mobile Health and mHealth Applications
Keywords
diabetes prevention, prediabetes, physical activity, wearable activity trackers, human connection, rural primary care, HbA1c, body mass index, weight, feasibility, quality improvement

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review